Nothing about "International Herald Tribune" editor Michael Getler's proper appearance gives away his adventurous nature. He looks like a desk jockey the kind of person whose travels are well-planned and include stays in large, respectable hotels and visits to the new newspapers his organization establishes. But underneath the suit, hides an avowed field man, with a journalistic record from the Vietnam War and Eastern Europe during the downfall of communism and an Israeli mission in Lebanon in 1978.
Getler came to Israel this time to inaugurate the 14th edition of the "Herald Tribune" printed here in cooperation with the daily newspaper "Haaretz". He came for two or three days, just to see how things are going and check out the new edition, and he's already off again, back to Paris, where he has resided for the past few years.
Getler knows his competitor here, the "Jerusalem Post". "I've seen it a few times," he admits unwillingly and is hardly overjoyed to express an opinion on the paper. "I don't see the "Jerusalem Post" as competition. I don't want to express an opinion about it. The point is there are 60,000 Americans in Israel, many other English-speakers and about 500,000 English-speaking visitors. This is a region in which we can expand much more than in the past. The new edition does not stem from the desire to compete with the "Jerusalem Post".
"The Israeli population is a devout news consumer. We think there are many good readers for us here. Before we began to print here, the paper was flown here from Frankfurt and arrived a day late. It is crazy for us not to be here in the early morning, with that kind of English readership."
After 26 years at the "Washington Post", during which he was a reporter, a foreign correspondent and finally deputy managing editor, he was taken a little over a year ago to edit the "International Herald Tribune". The Tribune is a joint venture of the "Washington Post" and the "New York Times", so it was a friendly transfer, within the same concern.
Do you miss the field?
"Yes, I miss it, and I still travel around a lot. But at some point in a journalist's life, and this is naturally only true of some journalists, you acquire a sense of confidence in your news judgment, and it becomes very tempting to use all the experience you have gained to create a newspaper. You feel that you see the whole picture, that you can guide others in how to go into the field, and what they should seek there. You can help younger journalists develop."
We met during a rather dangerous period for the press. The much-covered death of Princess Diana has raised old ghosts concerning limiting the press, laws against paparazzi photographers, redrafting more extreme privacy laws, not self-regulation but externally-imposed regulation. On this matter, Getler, who is of course far from anything that even smells of tabloid, is very resolute.
"I believe the press should not be limited. The press must have complete freedom to act, and the pain the press causes in a few specific instances is certainly a fair price to pay for its overall contribution to society, for information, which is the soul of democracy.
"I personally would not order such a photo of Diana, but I think that newspaper readers are adults capable of using judgment and are free not to lend their patronage to things that lack taste. They have the right to decide which paper to buy or not to buy. Hounding Diana in order to photograph her then publishing the photos may be tasteless, but not something which needs to be forbidden by law."
Getler is a big believer in written media, print. Television, at least American television, appears to him an inferior medium. "Television," he says, "has never provided the in-depth coverage of a newspaper. It gives sound bites, no commentary or analysis. American news programs have gone downhill in recent years from the point of view of coverage, as covering international events is very expensive, so it isn't done often. They also seem to feel that, since the end of the Cold War, people are only interested in domestic news. If you want a report of Clinton's speech to Congress, you will get it from a newspaper, not from any television station. On US television you see sitcoms, local news and news about the lives of celebrities."
After television took a bite out of newspaper readership, along came the Internet, which will be a much more dangerous enemy when it grows up. A kind of newspaper that doesn't update just an hour before it goes to print, but every minute. Accessible, simple, close to the hearts of the young. Who will then need a printed newspaper reporting the results of the television poll on election night, when their computer offers up-to-the-minute vote count results?
What is the role of the press in the age of electronic communications?
"The role remains the same. Print media will not be replaced by electronic media. Somehow, the two media will find a way to coexist. Just like newspapers were not replaced by television.
"In many ways, newspapers and the Internet complement each other. Many newspapers have Internet sites today, as well as columns in print editions explaining to readers how to find information in the electronic media. It is true that the Internet can offer you all your news, including commentary and analysis. But the newspaper, divvied up by the family at breakfast, taken on a train or to the bathroom, saved, from which articles can be cut out to read over and over again, is here to stay.
"This is a period of difficult struggle for newspapers, particularly for the hearts and minds of young readers, who have gown up in the electronic age. But my logic tells me that good newspapers will survive, and some will even flourish."
Who will survive?
"Serious newspapers, because there is still a large population that appreciates receiving the information that newspapers do best - in-depth reporting and analysis.
"The Internet is a kind of journalism that hasn't yet stabilized in any form and has not been widely-accepted as a form of news reporting. If you want to read your news on a screen, that's fine. My feeling is that there will still be many people that won't want to read their newspaper on a screen, but on paper, that they can take anywhere with them."
That is true of this generation. What about the next generation?
The younger generation will be more and more involved in electronic communications. But I claim that nonetheless there will always be people like us who prefer a newspaper. They may also be consumers of electronic communications, but also newspaper."
The question is if there will be enough such people to keep the print newspapers alive.
"I hope so. I hope so very much. Otherwise news has no public effect. If everything you see is done in the privacy of a home or office, on the screen, there is no sense that something is happening, something that belongs to the whole community, to the family. When you peek at a newspaper on the subway or on the newsstand, you have a sense of communion, that others know what you know, are interested in what interests you, talk about those things. I think that will be lost if all news consumption becomes electronic."